search
top

Peruta Goes En Banc

According to legal sources, it seems the Ninth Circuit has issued an order for an en banc hearing in Peruta. It might be the bit of pessimist in me, but I doubt this is good news for gun owners in the Ninth Circuit.

13 Responses to “Peruta Goes En Banc”

  1. Aaron says:

    Supposedly the panel of judges will be filled at random. Got any four leaf clovers to donate to the cause?

  2. Matt says:

    Confirmed, Peruta will be heard en banc: http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/content/view.php?pk_id=0000000722

    I’m afraid the 9th Circuit panel decision will definitely be overturned. And in the meantime, Peruta “shall not be cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit.” So it’s as if it never happened.

  3. Ian Argent says:

    Was the original 3-judge panel unusually pro-liberty for the circuit?

    • BTR says:

      I’m pretty sure the original trail was mostly Republican appointees, which is not typical for the 9th.

      Yeah, we need more four leaf clovers.

      The supremes need to take a carry case already.

  4. beatbox says:

    Question: Will a rejection en banc help or hurt the cause? Alan “The Guy Who Is Actually Doing Something to Advance Gun Rights” Gura and SAF have been pursuing a narrow strategy of getting the Supreme Court to acknowledge a right to carry.

    There are not many good cases left to kick upstairs. DC is the only hope left to challenge a total ban–if they follow thru on the appeals. If Peruta is the best chance to see some 2A SCOTUS action before the Heller 5 die/retire, should we hope for it being overturned en banc?

    • Ian Argent says:

      So far, all of the cases have been appealed to SCOTUS by the pr-rights side after a loss; perhaps we need an anti-rights appeal?

      Though, there is still a circuit split between the 7th and 2nd/4th

      • beatboxx says:

        I don’t think Jerry Brown would be that stupid, but you can count on DC doing it if it goes that far.

        • Ian Argent says:

          Is Jerry Brown sufficiently in control of the defendants, though, to prevent an appeal from them? Will he be in office when this plays out?

          • beatboxx says:

            Oh, that’s right. It’s the County of San Diego and not the state. I don’t know.

        • Brad says:

          Actually DC chose not to appeal. Which is why there is right now a may issue CCW law in Washington D.C. Of course that isn’t the end of that story, since the new law is overly restrictive.

          Illinois also knuckled under and chose not to appeal. Which is why there is right now a must issue CCW law in Illinois.

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore_v._Madigan#Legacy

          After the D.C v Heller and Mcdonald v Chicago decisions which were such disasters for the gun-control movement, the political left seems to have wised up and decided not to appeal cases they lose at the level of a Federal Circuit Court of Appeal.

  5. Harry Schell says:

    th areThe appalling thing about this decision is that there is no one with standing to replace Gore. The solons of the 9th reportedly are going to combine Richards with Peruta because the Sheriff there wants to fight and they can also let CA DOJ intervene, which they cannot do with any legitimacy on Peruta.

    Legal buffoonery, but not unknown for the 9th.

    It may be so odious that SCOTUS will take the case to slap down the 9th for their conduct, not so much for the issue.

  6. teebonicus says:

    It may be a blessing in disguise. So far, the SCOTUS has denied certiorari in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th circuits. This could be the case that propels the SCOTUS to grant cert, and to settle this issue once and for all.

    I’m optimistic that the decision would come down on the side of the right to carry. If that happens, the whole northeastern “commie corridor” and California, Hawaii and Marianas will be STOL and HAVE to comply.

    After the “may issue” dragon has been slain, we can then move on to the unconstitutional “assault weapons” bans.

top